Maps were actually brought out and discussions of what other English-speaking countries would take them went on for hours. The people I was staying with honestly seemed to feel threatened in their personal and familial safety by what is they now see to be a clear ultra-conservative American majority.
Do they have any real reason to feel threatened? No. What could Bush/the terrible conservatives possible do that would be so horrible. Reign in your imaginations people. The monsters are in your heads. You need to seriously calm down and realized that no matter who gets elected, the average American's lifestyle will hardly be affected.
Within a year Bush pissed off everyone and thumbed his nose at the international community. He's taken away freedoms of the American people in the name of security.
Name one freedom you've lost. Be specific please. I know it'll be difficult, but please try.
He started a war for reasons that the world told him were wrong, have since been more than proven wrong, and it has turned sour just like everyone said it would (except Bush and friends).
Lets see, we have UN resolutions that told Saddam to allow inpectors and disarm, and he didn't, so the US finally took the step of forcing him to. As for the whole world disagreeing with us, I guess Britain, Spain, Australia, etc don't count as part of the world.
it's hard not to know he's a fuckup now.
I'm sorry, but not everyone (51% of the voters) sees Bush as a "fuckup". The economy is going up, jobs are being added (though I doubt any president has much influence on that anyway), Afghanistan just had elections, Iraq will in January, the US hasn't been attacked since 9-11, Al-Queda has lost it's potency, there's a ban on embryonic stem-cell research (i see that as a good thing), we all got tax cuts and child credits, the no child left behind act is working, etc.
Ignore the fact that in an ideal world, none of these things would have happened. But now it's time to wake up and realize that we don't live in an ideal world.
The japanese were put in camps because they were a security risk during a war. A terrible event, but neccessary.
Being gay in the military makes the other guys uncomfortable. That isn't good if you want high morale.
Homosexuality is treated as the norm, when in reality, it should be classified as a mental disorder. When someone behaves in a way that obviously isn't natural, one would think that there is something wrong with that person. For some reason we go the other way on homosexuality. While gays need tolerance, they also need help to get past their disorder.
And the other things you mentioned about religious/racial descrimination...those are just sad and unfortunate tendencies of human race.
the Patriot Act would give them the clout to find out who does or doesn't hold these views.
Well, they could just ASK someone their political views and get the same results.
Your parroted lies from the Bush camp are almost not worth replying to. But let's cut to the chase, instead of parsing words:
Your parroted lies from tke Kerry camp are almost not worth replying to. Bet let's cut to the chase, instead of parsing words:
The economy? Even after you've cooked it as much as you could, and given TRILLIONS away, mostly to rich people, it's still mismanaged into incoherence
Just who do you think provides the jobs to the rest of us? Am I on my 40k a year job going to hire anyone other than a kid to mow my lawn? These people get TRILLIONS back because A. They pay the MOST tax already. B. They are the ones who create jobs.
He's opened national parks to oil and other mining, as well as threatening the Alaskan wilderness for a maximum few months, delivered years from now.
Oh good God, not the Alaskan wilderness! Not only is it a frozen tundra up there where not a whole lot lives, the oil exploration would impact 1% of it altogether. Remember the pipeline that was supposed to be so bad for the carbou? They're thriving because the pipeline provides warm areas to breed next to.
And once again, instead of whining about it, you should be promoting ways of doing it cleanly, because we ought to be exploring these areas.
You sick fool, you're playing with millions of lives, including mine, with that moronic disregard for safety.
My comment was in response to you saying that JFK was brave for stading up to the Soviets, who could have killed A HELL OF A LOT MORE PEOPLE than teh current conflict in Iraq. Try keeping your standards to your side too.
Iraq is a success. Saddam is gone. Elections are scheduled. Once the insurgents are crushed, or give up, Iraq will be well on it's way to becoming a new free country.
Kerry helped end the war
You're right he did. He demoralized our troops and rallied the Vietnamese. Let me give you a quote from Colonel Bui Tin of the N. Vietnamese army:
"Support for the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and would struggle along with us.... those people represented the conscience of America.... part of it's war- making capability, and we turning that power in our favor."
http://www.vwam.com/vets/buitin.html
Kerry and his antiwar buddies sure helped the war end--by helping our enemies.
Instead of regulating...why not try innovating? Build cars/trucks that use less gas, or don't even use gas. Promote deisel vehicles. Donate to research. Do something more productive other than bitch about what politians are or aren't doing.
And, there isn't any concrete proof yet that emmissions from cars are causing any noticeable damage to the environment. (I'm assuming you are talking about global warming.)
Before I read this post, I used to think that you could only find this much crap at Wal-Mart.
Here's a reality check just a few weeks before we have possibly our last chance to keep our republic from descending into an unsustainable empire.
Do you honestly think that the US has become an "empire" since Bush took office? I fear that you have strayed to far to the left and fallen off the earth. Who has the US conquered or taken control of? Iraq you say? Wrong. We have not conquered Iraq, we have liberated it. For now the US helps their new government off it's feet.
Bush has actually lied us into war
Unless he somehow managed to trick the entire CIA and Congress, they all saw the same info he did and came to the same conclusion. So maybe they all lied to get us into war?
through the recession
You mean the one he inherited from Clinton? And how did he lie to get us through it? By making predictions that weren't 100% accurate? Not even the best on wallstreet can do that. Sorry.
the destruction of the environment through oil, coal, nuclear and every other lucrative pollution
Actually the water/air has actually become cleaner since Bush took office.
And if you don't like pollution...stop driving your car, turn off the lights, and recycle. It's going to do a whole lot more good than bitching about the President.
Kerry has been telling the hard truth, and has even risked alienating millions of denial addicts with his truth.
You can't be serious. The guy can't even get the story about if and when he was in Cambodia right. I haven't heard him mention the hard truth about how his words were used to demoralize captured US soldiers. I haven't heard him talk about meeting with N. Vietnamese officials during a time of war. He hasn't talked about how he rarely actually does his job in Washington, or how he has more money than most of us will see in a lifetime.
Bush Sr had a lot of faults
Being a Conservative/Republican was probably the first one on your list.
If only some of these Republicans could gamble with the same steel balls as the most famous liberal Democrat of the 20th Century.
Uh, what do you call liberating Iraq? If Iraq stabilizes, we have a big ally in the Middle East. If it doesn't, well, good try anyway. If JFK had been wrong, on the other hand, we could have had straight up nuclear war.
Don't let the past 4 years of fearmongering and devastation extinguish your capacity for hope.
Yes, don't listen the the doom and gloom Democrats. Things are not as bad as you seem. Mr. Partiot Act is not waiting in the bushes to rape you. There won't be a draft. Iraq is so far a success. The economy is still going up. (If you'd like to see it stay that way, go invest!) The sky is not falling.
You Righties see America as something to which you owe loyalty,
You don't owe loyalty to your country?
and you see and the President, Senators, et al as demigods. However, we Lefties see America as the property of its citizens, and its leaders as our employees.
We need rephrase this. "Leftie Presidents, Senators, et al see themselves as demigods."
We on the Left see humans as something above animals..."
Then why is it that all of the animal rights whacko's and abortion fanatics are on the left side?
Do you think we have broken the Iraqi will to fight?
Who do you think we are fighting over there? The Iraqi people? You seem to, and that's completely wrong. The Iraqi people have no will to fight, as the fight is not directed at them. The ones who are fighting are the insurgents/terrorists, who do not represent the Iraqi people. Most of the insurgents in Iraq are either former Republican Guard soldiers or fighters from other countries, like Iran, Sudan, etc. The goal in Iraq is not to break the will of the Iraqi people. Our fight is not with them. Our goal is to give them a government that will not repress them, and equip them to defend themselves.
In the early days of the war I even saw an Iraqi man come up and talk to our troops while they were doing some sort of news interview. His exact words were "Not like 1991. You not leave, right?". I'll never forget that image as long as I live.
Good, because there you see why we must stay and see this through. The Iraqis want to be free, and they know that the US is there to help them obtain their freedom. They DON'T want us to leave this time, until the work is done.
I like that quote. But what we should do is find a way to eliminate representives altogether and just have everyone vote. Of course, as I'm writing this I'm imagining the Pandora's Box of problems that would open up...like voter intimidation of levels unheard of, and other such things.
I do think what's going on in Iraq is a good thing. A free Middle East nation is one less nation for terrorists to draw recruits from. Just think. If you're a poor, repressed Iraqi living under Saddam, you're not going to have a lot going for you and you're going to be a heck of a lot more likely to listen to a terrorist recruiter. An Iraqi who has a good job and prospects in a free Iraq, on the other hand, would be more likely to tell the terrorist to screw off.
Why do people hold to this illusion that having 3 parties will fix anything? The third party will be as corrupt as the first two. As soon as a third party candidate gets in office, you know corporations and interest groups will be waving money in his/her face. And when money talks, politicians listen.
Also, third parties don't offer "more choice" as is purported. They usually choose one issue to run with that a lot of people will agree with them on, like say the Green Party who is big on nature. However, that might be the only thing that people would agree with them on, and the rest of their agenda could be bs. Image a system with a bunch of these little parties.
Social Security wasn't created to be retirement program. It was put into effect to keep old folks from dying in the streets, and evaluated on that criteria, it has been very successful.
you mean it was created to:
1. Help people retire who blew all their money during their working life
2. Keep aging parents from being a "burden" on their families
3. Be a way for politians to scare old people during aach election year...example: "The big bad Republican's want to take away your money!"
As it is now, anytime someone wants to speak out against the war, someone will say "what about the troops" or "you should support the troops". Screw that. Those people are there voluntarily.
Exactly, they are there voluntarily. How would you feel if you volunteered to do something good for your country, and got spit on for it? You probably wouldn't volunteer again, nor would others be encouraged to do so. Support your troops!
This makes it very, very easy for those back at home to "support" the war because it doesn't cause any pain. (Those directly impacted by someone serving is a different matter...)
Volunteer soldiers DO have families and friends too.
War should be painful. Not for those that volunteered for the armed forces because they wanted to learn a skill and maybe earn some scholarship money.
Ok, the military is not a free education and exercise program. That comes as a perk to the real job, which is being a soldier. And what do soldiers do? Go to battle. That's the job description. Soldiers know what they are in for when they volunteer, although they may hope that they don't see battle.
First off, the US didn't have to kick anything to get the Middle East pissed off at it. There's this thing called radical Islam that hates the west and everything from it, and the US is the corner stone of western civilization. They hate the US for what it is, not for anything it's done. These radicals would have the world in chains forged from their extreme religios views, if they were given the chance. That's there goal. That's what they want. The US doesn't have to do a thing to provoke them.
Secondly, nothing could be better than a free Iraq. Where do terrorists get their recruits from? The poor, the hopeless, young guys who have no other way of making a name for themselves. In a free Iraq, two things happen. You introduce a system where the poverty the these people come from is reduced. They have this thing called HOPE. The other thing is that the terrorists lose a large chunk of money that Saddam used to feed them.
Easy to say when it's not your country that was invaded.
Invaded? How about liberated?
non-American civilians that are paying the price.
And what is that price? Do you honestly think that the Iraqi's would prefer to still be under Saddam? A guy who killed out of whim? I think not. And if you think so, I'd say you are a fool. The Iraqi's will be free, but there is always pain before birth, and in this case, the birth of a new free nation in the middle east. That is something in my opinion, worth fighting for.
Slashdot Mirror
Maps were actually brought out and discussions of what other English-speaking countries would take them went on for hours. The people I was staying with honestly seemed to feel threatened in their personal and familial safety by what is they now see to be a clear ultra-conservative American majority. Do they have any real reason to feel threatened? No. What could Bush/the terrible conservatives possible do that would be so horrible. Reign in your imaginations people. The monsters are in your heads. You need to seriously calm down and realized that no matter who gets elected, the average American's lifestyle will hardly be affected.
Within a year Bush pissed off everyone and thumbed his nose at the international community. He's taken away freedoms of the American people in the name of security.
Name one freedom you've lost. Be specific please. I know it'll be difficult, but please try.
He started a war for reasons that the world told him were wrong, have since been more than proven wrong, and it has turned sour just like everyone said it would (except Bush and friends).
Lets see, we have UN resolutions that told Saddam to allow inpectors and disarm, and he didn't, so the US finally took the step of forcing him to. As for the whole world disagreeing with us, I guess Britain, Spain, Australia, etc don't count as part of the world.
it's hard not to know he's a fuckup now.
I'm sorry, but not everyone (51% of the voters) sees Bush as a "fuckup". The economy is going up, jobs are being added (though I doubt any president has much influence on that anyway), Afghanistan just had elections, Iraq will in January, the US hasn't been attacked since 9-11, Al-Queda has lost it's potency, there's a ban on embryonic stem-cell research (i see that as a good thing), we all got tax cuts and child credits, the no child left behind act is working, etc.
Ignore the fact that in an ideal world, none of these things would have happened. But now it's time to wake up and realize that we don't live in an ideal world.
The japanese were put in camps because they were a security risk during a war. A terrible event, but neccessary.
Being gay in the military makes the other guys uncomfortable. That isn't good if you want high morale.
Homosexuality is treated as the norm, when in reality, it should be classified as a mental disorder. When someone behaves in a way that obviously isn't natural, one would think that there is something wrong with that person. For some reason we go the other way on homosexuality. While gays need tolerance, they also need help to get past their disorder.
And the other things you mentioned about religious/racial descrimination...those are just sad and unfortunate tendencies of human race.
the Patriot Act would give them the clout to find out who does or doesn't hold these views. Well, they could just ASK someone their political views and get the same results.
Obviously they contained pictures of the alien landing!
Your parroted lies from the Bush camp are almost not worth replying to. But let's cut to the chase, instead of parsing words:
.... those people represented the conscience of America .... part of it's war- making capability, and we turning that power in our favor."
Your parroted lies from tke Kerry camp are almost not worth replying to. Bet let's cut to the chase, instead of parsing words:
The economy? Even after you've cooked it as much as you could, and given TRILLIONS away, mostly to rich people, it's still mismanaged into incoherence
Just who do you think provides the jobs to the rest of us? Am I on my 40k a year job going to hire anyone other than a kid to mow my lawn? These people get TRILLIONS back because A. They pay the MOST tax already. B. They are the ones who create jobs.
He's opened national parks to oil and other mining, as well as threatening the Alaskan wilderness for a maximum few months, delivered years from now.
Oh good God, not the Alaskan wilderness! Not only is it a frozen tundra up there where not a whole lot lives, the oil exploration would impact 1% of it altogether. Remember the pipeline that was supposed to be so bad for the carbou? They're thriving because the pipeline provides warm areas to breed next to.
And once again, instead of whining about it, you should be promoting ways of doing it cleanly, because we ought to be exploring these areas.
You sick fool, you're playing with millions of lives, including mine, with that moronic disregard for safety.
My comment was in response to you saying that JFK was brave for stading up to the Soviets, who could have killed A HELL OF A LOT MORE PEOPLE than teh current conflict in Iraq. Try keeping your standards to your side too.
Iraq is a success. Saddam is gone. Elections are scheduled. Once the insurgents are crushed, or give up, Iraq will be well on it's way to becoming a new free country.
Kerry helped end the war
You're right he did. He demoralized our troops and rallied the Vietnamese. Let me give you a quote from Colonel Bui Tin of the N. Vietnamese army:
"Support for the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and would struggle along with us
http://www.vwam.com/vets/buitin.html
Kerry and his antiwar buddies sure helped the war end--by helping our enemies.
Instead of regulating...why not try innovating? Build cars/trucks that use less gas, or don't even use gas. Promote deisel vehicles. Donate to research. Do something more productive other than bitch about what politians are or aren't doing.
And, there isn't any concrete proof yet that emmissions from cars are causing any noticeable damage to the environment. (I'm assuming you are talking about global warming.)
Before I read this post, I used to think that you could only find this much crap at Wal-Mart.
Here's a reality check just a few weeks before we have possibly our last chance to keep our republic from descending into an unsustainable empire.
Do you honestly think that the US has become an "empire" since Bush took office? I fear that you have strayed to far to the left and fallen off the earth. Who has the US conquered or taken control of? Iraq you say? Wrong. We have not conquered Iraq, we have liberated it. For now the US helps their new government off it's feet.
Bush has actually lied us into war
Unless he somehow managed to trick the entire CIA and Congress, they all saw the same info he did and came to the same conclusion. So maybe they all lied to get us into war?
through the recession
You mean the one he inherited from Clinton? And how did he lie to get us through it? By making predictions that weren't 100% accurate? Not even the best on wallstreet can do that. Sorry.
the destruction of the environment through oil, coal, nuclear and every other lucrative pollution
Actually the water/air has actually become cleaner since Bush took office.
And if you don't like pollution...stop driving your car, turn off the lights, and recycle. It's going to do a whole lot more good than bitching about the President.
Kerry has been telling the hard truth, and has even risked alienating millions of denial addicts with his truth.
You can't be serious. The guy can't even get the story about if and when he was in Cambodia right. I haven't heard him mention the hard truth about how his words were used to demoralize captured US soldiers. I haven't heard him talk about meeting with N. Vietnamese officials during a time of war. He hasn't talked about how he rarely actually does his job in Washington, or how he has more money than most of us will see in a lifetime.
Bush Sr had a lot of faults
Being a Conservative/Republican was probably the first one on your list.
If only some of these Republicans could gamble with the same steel balls as the most famous liberal Democrat of the 20th Century.
Uh, what do you call liberating Iraq? If Iraq stabilizes, we have a big ally in the Middle East. If it doesn't, well, good try anyway. If JFK had been wrong, on the other hand, we could have had straight up nuclear war.
Don't let the past 4 years of fearmongering and devastation extinguish your capacity for hope.
Yes, don't listen the the doom and gloom Democrats. Things are not as bad as you seem. Mr. Partiot Act is not waiting in the bushes to rape you. There won't be a draft. Iraq is so far a success. The economy is still going up. (If you'd like to see it stay that way, go invest!) The sky is not falling.
You Righties see America as something to which you owe loyalty, You don't owe loyalty to your country? and you see and the President, Senators, et al as demigods. However, we Lefties see America as the property of its citizens, and its leaders as our employees. We need rephrase this. "Leftie Presidents, Senators, et al see themselves as demigods." We on the Left see humans as something above animals..." Then why is it that all of the animal rights whacko's and abortion fanatics are on the left side?
Do you think we have broken the Iraqi will to fight?
Who do you think we are fighting over there? The Iraqi people? You seem to, and that's completely wrong. The Iraqi people have no will to fight, as the fight is not directed at them. The ones who are fighting are the insurgents/terrorists, who do not represent the Iraqi people. Most of the insurgents in Iraq are either former Republican Guard soldiers or fighters from other countries, like Iran, Sudan, etc. The goal in Iraq is not to break the will of the Iraqi people. Our fight is not with them. Our goal is to give them a government that will not repress them, and equip them to defend themselves.
In the early days of the war I even saw an Iraqi man come up and talk to our troops while they were doing some sort of news interview. His exact words were "Not like 1991. You not leave, right?". I'll never forget that image as long as I live.
Good, because there you see why we must stay and see this through. The Iraqis want to be free, and they know that the US is there to help them obtain their freedom. They DON'T want us to leave this time, until the work is done.
Uh...and you base these guarantees on what information?
I like that quote. But what we should do is find a way to eliminate representives altogether and just have everyone vote. Of course, as I'm writing this I'm imagining the Pandora's Box of problems that would open up...like voter intimidation of levels unheard of, and other such things.
I do think what's going on in Iraq is a good thing. A free Middle East nation is one less nation for terrorists to draw recruits from. Just think. If you're a poor, repressed Iraqi living under Saddam, you're not going to have a lot going for you and you're going to be a heck of a lot more likely to listen to a terrorist recruiter. An Iraqi who has a good job and prospects in a free Iraq, on the other hand, would be more likely to tell the terrorist to screw off.
Why do people hold to this illusion that having 3 parties will fix anything? The third party will be as corrupt as the first two. As soon as a third party candidate gets in office, you know corporations and interest groups will be waving money in his/her face. And when money talks, politicians listen.
Also, third parties don't offer "more choice" as is purported. They usually choose one issue to run with that a lot of people will agree with them on, like say the Green Party who is big on nature. However, that might be the only thing that people would agree with them on, and the rest of their agenda could be bs. Image a system with a bunch of these little parties.
I'll stick with Republicrats.
Yay, someone that sees that both parties are as corrupt as hell, and they both bow before the mighty dollar!
Social Security wasn't created to be retirement program. It was put into effect to keep old folks from dying in the streets, and evaluated on that criteria, it has been very successful. you mean it was created to: 1. Help people retire who blew all their money during their working life 2. Keep aging parents from being a "burden" on their families 3. Be a way for politians to scare old people during aach election year...example: "The big bad Republican's want to take away your money!"
As it is now, anytime someone wants to speak out against the war, someone will say "what about the troops" or "you should support the troops". Screw that. Those people are there voluntarily.
Exactly, they are there voluntarily. How would you feel if you volunteered to do something good for your country, and got spit on for it? You probably wouldn't volunteer again, nor would others be encouraged to do so. Support your troops!
This makes it very, very easy for those back at home to "support" the war because it doesn't cause any pain. (Those directly impacted by someone serving is a different matter...)
Volunteer soldiers DO have families and friends too.
War should be painful. Not for those that volunteered for the armed forces because they wanted to learn a skill and maybe earn some scholarship money.
Ok, the military is not a free education and exercise program. That comes as a perk to the real job, which is being a soldier. And what do soldiers do? Go to battle. That's the job description. Soldiers know what they are in for when they volunteer, although they may hope that they don't see battle.
First off, the US didn't have to kick anything to get the Middle East pissed off at it. There's this thing called radical Islam that hates the west and everything from it, and the US is the corner stone of western civilization. They hate the US for what it is, not for anything it's done. These radicals would have the world in chains forged from their extreme religios views, if they were given the chance. That's there goal. That's what they want. The US doesn't have to do a thing to provoke them.
Secondly, nothing could be better than a free Iraq. Where do terrorists get their recruits from? The poor, the hopeless, young guys who have no other way of making a name for themselves. In a free Iraq, two things happen. You introduce a system where the poverty the these people come from is reduced. They have this thing called HOPE. The other thing is that the terrorists lose a large chunk of money that Saddam used to feed them.
And the end of this wise saying:
Some dogs will bite your ass anyway.
Wait a minute...that's not flip-flopping, he just making a new decision based on new information, if we're to go with what Kerry claims for himself.
Easy to say when it's not your country that was invaded.
Invaded? How about liberated?
non-American civilians that are paying the price.
And what is that price? Do you honestly think that the Iraqi's would prefer to still be under Saddam? A guy who killed out of whim? I think not. And if you think so, I'd say you are a fool. The Iraqi's will be free, but there is always pain before birth, and in this case, the birth of a new free nation in the middle east. That is something in my opinion, worth fighting for.
anybody who claims that the Bush government doesn't lie and manipulate on a regular basis is not in the business of viewing the world at all.
Let me fix your statement to make it a bit more accurate:
anybody who claims that the government doesn't lie and manipulate on a regular basis is not in the business of viewing the world at all.